48 hours and counting............. I truely hope Saddam heeds this warning and for the sake of his people, leaves the country with his sons and goes into exile. Unfortunately, I don't think he will unless we send him to his maker. In that case let's hope this all goes down in one fell swoop and that all of our troops and those of the countries at our side, come home soon and safely!

If the U.S. government had secrets that it couldn't share with the general public that would be one thing. But don't you think that they could share that classified information between the heads of state? Apparently whatever was discussed was not able to convince any other countries.... that is a sad statement.

I don't believe that the french, the russians, the germans, (oh, and the rest of the world ) are necessarily anti-war, its that the case the government has laid out has not been convincing. Just because Pres. Bush says one thing does not make it necessarily true. Let me as this, has the government had a history of telling the truth? I think not.

So we have Saddam Hussein who doesn't want to comply with the U.N. and so we now want him out. Isn't the U.S. just as guilty? We've thumbed our noses at what the U.N. thinks...Sad.

I'm pro U.S. and Anti-Bush...

And one last comment, we can support our troops without supporting the war.

goharley,
You are right about the congress but disregarding the outcome, they have the power to change things whereas in case of the UN it has absolutely no power and it is useless. What I said was primarily my view of the UN and had nothing to do with the current Iraqi situation.

I believe that the French, the Germans, and the Russians will be found to have been trading in items that fall outside of the U.N. agreement that was entered into at the end of the first Gulf war. This will come to light when we get inside Iraq and get a look at the books. Would you vote to blow the whistle on yourself if you were one of these countries, I think not!

France has already been shown to have sold components for rocket fuel via China. Oh yes let's see China was against this too, funny how this works.

Hey Imatwork,
The Russians just signed a multi-billion dollar trade agreement with Iraq. The French get a majority of their oil from Iraq where as we get less than 5% of ours from them; a quantity that the Saudis could more than make up for. I am very partial towards the Russians after spending a month there to bring home my oldest daughter. However, they must realize our intentions and join us in riddig the world of dictators such as Saddam.

TabFry

As the Aussie would say "good on you." A good friend adopted two children out of Russia, they are beautiful kids. But just in our case, me thinks it is more then just oil.

I guess one inteligent remark deserves another so I'll say this.

If you go as a human shield to Protect your adopted dictator, I'll go as Rambo but I hunt with a bow not a riffle.

It would have been alot easier for me if I was able to join the military (easier as in finding a good paying job!), I had to work my arse of to get a good job here.

Guess I have the monkey on my back now, oh well.





I dont think anybody likes war besides the weapons makers. No they dont brag about there glorious battles! They rarely talked about there experiences. Some terrible things happen in war. But the sad fact is that war is sometimes needed to bring peace, and every one of my relatives say they'll do it again! Why? In my opinion because they have invested too much of there lives in fighting for this country to see it go to hell. I dont think people like that stupid traitorous hoe burning the American flag in Isreal does much good for our troops morale. I will continue to support them by any means I have and for now what I have is my speech and this electronic gizmo.

You dont fire people up by saying what there doing is wrong. I want are troops to go in knowing they are fully supported by there benifactors back home! and will come home to a hero's welcome! I offer my humble Thanks and Gratitude and will even share some honey holes when they come back to take there mind off the horrors of war.

With the upcoming events I really thank god (and Florida) GW is in office. I support him and our troops 100%. Things could be much worse Gore could be there with his head stuck in the sand doing nothing to fix the problem.

We spend a lot of time thanking Bob for this Great Website, and he deserves all the credit.

Why doesn't anyone ever thank Gore for inventing the internet? Without him, we couldn't argue with each otehr on issues such as this.

Twig and CWU Girl:

You have provided well reasoned reply's to my post except you really didn't answer the question, what do we do next enlight Iraq's continued non-compliance. I have heard estimates as high as 50,000 Iraqi's will die of starvation per year without food aids. The UN and others have tried to deal with this issue by providing food and Saddham takes the food/aid for his own benefit. While the Bush administrations references to Iraqi links to Alchaida are not backed up by a full fledged documentation of proof, Ari Fliesher today reiterated in his press conference today of Iraqi aid to terrorists when asked that direct question.

It is clear that the strategy of the US Government post 9-11 has changed to pre-emption. The minimum level of evidence to justify military action is debatable (remember Bush did get approval from Congress post 9-11 to use force against Iraq if Saddham didn't disarm), but I will error on the side of protecting the United States against aggressors (who directly attack us or our ally's or can support financially or provide arms to terrorists).

What I don't agree with Bush on is his stead fast drive for tax cutts given the cost of the war and the expanding deficit.

I have to disagree that there is any proof that Al Quida has ANY ties to Iraq. Why would Iraq fund a terrorist organization that openly stresses Iraq as one of its enemies? It just doesn't make logical sense. Saddam knows, as does President Bush, that if there was any link- a shred of proof- we'd already have the planes in the air. Bin Laden wants Saddam out. Saddam is not religious, enjoys scotch and red wines, is said to like old Western movies, and smokes cuban cigars.. This is NOT an Islamic theocracy in any stretch of the imagination. And that is directly against what Bin Laden stands for- making Saddam his enemy.

On of my professors is a ex-CIA, middle eastern expert. His belief that if Bin Laden, Al Quida or any faction there of was in Iraq, they'd be capped in the back of the head and buried in the desert as soon as they could be caught. It is not in the interest of Saddam to have such a destablizing force within his borders- it threatens his grip on power.

As you said, we have changed to a foreign policy of pre-emption, the so-called Bush Doctrine. IMO, its a dangerous step, but that is our current course. What is Iraq capable of- and what are they likely to do? Not a whole lot. Saddam is a power-crazed dictator, but he is not insane enough to do anything to end his own life. An assult on Israel, which is his only option, is entirely too foolish and he's not really concerned with Palestinians anyway.

As for him getting the bright idea to share weapons of mass distruction with terrorists, which was one of Bushes points last night... Give me a break. Nation states are EXTREMELY tight with such technology. The Soviet Union NEVER once gave nuclear weapons to any of its client states or China (which resulted in the split in relations between the two for much of the latter half of the 20th century). These aren't things you give to Islamic fundamentalists outside your control. It doesn't make sense to believe that is a real threatening option that could actually happen.

IMO, of course.

CWUgirl,

What do you think the chances are that Saddam will go into exile, only to return and try to regain his throne? Although he's said he will stay and die in Iraq, I don't think he's that suicidal.

I'm sure if he did go somewhere we'd continue to hunt him down so we could try him for war crimes. But what if he could go into seclusion, a la bin Laden, and then organize a coup as he did in the 80's? (or was it 70's?)

Does that seem like a plausible scenario?

Goharley,

That senario seems highly unlikely to me. Here's why...

Saddam suffers from what I call Michael Jackson syndrome. He lacks what Jackson lacks- people who provide a challenging view to his reality.

In Saddam's reality, he's unstoppable. Why didn't he back down before the last gulf war and retreat? Because he honestly thought that his army was unbeatable by the US. Now we can look at that as extremely naive, but he doesn't have advisors to tell him "hey, the US is going to pound you in to submission in a ground assult that will only last HOURS... maybe you should re-evaluate your game plan." Which is just like Michael Jackson doesn't have people around him to say, "it is inappropriate to sleep with young boys."

Saddam would kill those people who challenge his perception- killed one of his top advisors about a month ago, in fact.

IMO, Saddam will die in Iraq unless taken out to stand trial for war crimes.

Saddam came to power in 1968 when he was instituted as vice president after a revolt and his party (Baath) taking control. In I believe 1979 he became president by deposing of Bakr. Before 1968 he was in exhile- he did try to assassinate their prime minister. At that point in history, it was the high point of "Al Arab" nationalism, a pan-arab movement which united Syria and Egypt for a short time.

Today, I don't think there is a country that could protect him- or would want him. Lebenon, perhaps, since it is lawless.. Syria is unlikely because Isreal (IMO) would not allow him so close.

And as I said before, Bin Laden is not a friend to Saddam. They would not team up for a revival attempt of "damn yankees."

Good points.

The sad thing is that the Bush administration continues to act as though it is the French that have divided the U.N.. If that were true, then wouldn't we have more support than the Brittish, Israel, and Spain? Instead, we can't muster any support. It looks like it is the U.S. that has divided the U.N..

I don't argue that Saddam isn't a threat but the question is how and when we go about millitary action. Why not set some hard, realistic dates and then pursure millitary action if they are not met? Why not involve the rest of the world, or at least some part of? If the threat is as big as the Bush administration make it out to be don't you think other countries would be wanting to take him out?

In the begining of all of this, Bush wasn't going to seek and U.N. approval but later caved when he saw the politics starting to unravel. Now, after months of debate, he's going back on his original policy of "screw the U.N.", the very policy that Bush says he's trying to uphold...go figure.

If the world of pre-emptive strikes takes hold, look for bombs dropping out of nowhere on the U.S.. Korea has already stated that the U.S. isn't the only country who gets to play that game.

Pre-emptive???

According to UNR 678, military action (or enforcement as it is worded) is lawful for non-compliance.. I feel 12 years is way too long in the first place. The main unwritten reason for UNR 1441 was to reinforce UNR 678 so we could strike. Now, the UN Heads of State have no argument... Like GW said, "Since the UN doesn't want to enforce the UNR's, we will!"

Yep.. France gets their oil from Iraq and Russia just did a multi-billion dollar deal, but did they have planes crash into their buildings? I am sure that if they did, they would want a part of the action... Besides, we don't need more 'em.
Give it time, they'll come running...

Downriggin'

Pre-emptive in the sense that Iraq has not attacked us...

"but did they have planes crash into their buildings?"

What's that have to do with Iraq? Are you suggesting a connection between Iraq and 9/11??

No... I am suggesting that France and Russia would have a different perspective of the war.

Remember, there is no proof of ties right now...
We are protecting against future ties

Downriggin'

Well....... Russia actually has some major problems involving Islamic fundamentalists... Chetchyna, located within Russia, borders on Georgia, is almost 100% muslum- all "russians' have been driven out. In their seeking independence, they have done things like bomb various sites in Moscow and their most notable action being when they took a packed Moscow theatre hostage in January- which resulted in the dramatic gasing of the theatre by Putin's government which killed more people than the terrorists. Still no word on what that gas actually was.

So the Russians can definitely sympathize with us. We(US) currently have troops in Chetchyna and I believe Georgia. All apart of the war on terrorism.

They might.....

..but I doubt it would be so clouded a perspective that they would attack Britain because it could 'potentially' attack them in the future...I believe the Brits also have WMD...

It would be akin to arresting people because they are likely to commit a crime....pre-emptive crime prevention.

Some people probably thing that's a really good idea....